prikaz prve stranice dokumenta Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners
  Download
PDF 912.72 KB
Scientific paper - Original scientific paper
Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20 (2023), 6; 5189. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065189
Skroče, Kristina; Bettega, Simone; D’Emanuele, Samuel; Boccia, Gennaro; Schena, Federico; Tarperi, Cantor

Cite this document

Skroče, K., Bettega, S., D’Emanuele, S., Boccia, G., Schena, F. & Tarperi, C. (2023). Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20. (6). doi: 10.3390/ijerph20065189

Skroče, Kristina, et al. "Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 20, no. 6, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065189

Skroče, Kristina, Simone Bettega, Samuel D’Emanuele, Gennaro Boccia, Federico Schena and Cantor Tarperi. "Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 6 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065189

Skroče, K., et al. (2023) 'Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners', International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(6). doi: 10.3390/ijerph20065189

Skroče K, Bettega S, D’Emanuele S, Boccia G, Schena F, Tarperi C. Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health [Internet]. 2023 March 15 [cited 2025 February 12];20(6). doi: 10.3390/ijerph20065189

K. Skroče, S. Bettega, S. D’Emanuele, G. Boccia, F. Schena and C. Tarperi, "Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners", International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 20, no. 6, March 2023. [Online]. Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:184:880425. [Accessed: 12 February 2025]

Please login to the repository to save this object to your list.
Metadata
Title (english)Flat Versus Simulated Mountain Trail Running: A Multidisciplinary Comparison in Well-Trained Runners
AuthorKristina Skroče
AuthorSimone Bettega
AuthorSamuel D’Emanuele
AuthorGennaro Boccia
AuthorFederico Schena
AuthorCantor Tarperi
Author's institutionUniversity of Rijeka
Faculty of Medicine
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		SOCIAL SCIENCES
Kinesiology
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		BIOMEDICINE AND HEALTHCARE
Basic Medical Sciences
Human Physiology
Abstract (english)
This paper compares cardiopulmonary and neuromuscular parameters across three running aerobic speeds in two conditions that differed from a treadmill’s movement: flat condition (FC) and unpredictable roll variations similar to mountain trail running (URV). Twenty well-trained male runners (age 33 ± 8 years, body mass 70.3 ± 6.4 kg, height 1.77 ± 0.06 m, V˙O2max 63.8 ± 7.2 mL·kg−1·min−1) voluntarily participated in the study. Laboratory sessions consisted of a cardiopulmonary incremental ramp test (IRT) and two experimental protocols. Cardiopulmonary parameters, plasma lactate (BLa−), cadence, ground contact time (GT) and RPE values were assessed. We also recorded surface electromyographic (sEMG) signals from eight lower limb muscles, and we calculated, from the sEMG envelope, the amplitude and width of peak muscle activation for each step. Cardiopulmonary parameters were not significantly different between conditions (V˙O2: p = 0.104; BLa−: p = 0.214; HR: p = 0.788). The amplitude (p = 0.271) and width (p = 0.057) of sEMG activation peaks did not change between conditions. The variability of sEMG was significantly affected by conditions; indeed, the coefficient of variation in peak amplitude (p = 0.003) and peak width (p < 0.001) was higher in URV than in FC. Since the specific physical demands of running can differ between surfaces, coaches should resort to the use of non-traditional surfaces, emphasizing specific surface-related motor tasks that are normally observed in natural running environments. Seeing that the variability of muscle activations was affected, further studies are required to better understand the physiological effects induced by systematic surface-specific training and to define how variable-surface activities help injury prevention.
Keywords (english)
Languageenglish
Publication typeScientific paper - Original scientific paper
Publication statusPublished
Peer reviewPeer review - international
Publication versionPublished version
Journal titleInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Numberingvol. 20, no. 6, 5189
e-ISSN1660-4601
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065189
URN:NBNurn:nbn:hr:184:880425
Publication2023-03-15
Document URLhttps://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/6/5189
Type of resourceText
Access conditionsOpen access
Terms of useLicence Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) icon
Created on2023-05-17 08:56:50